Leaderboard

About "Green map" .

So thanks to Seabat we now have liveries for 6 Essex class refits. Apparently in 1962 CVA-16 Lexington was re-designated CVS-16 (Carrier, Anti Submarine) So I did a fictional runway lua for her with 12 helicopter, 8 S-2 Trackers and 12 F-8 Crusader for self defense.

Es ist erfrischend zu lesen, dass man nicht alleine damit steht. Ich bin mittlerweile 51 Jahre jung und fliege seit dem C-64, als meine Mutter mir in Hameln in einem kleinen Computerladen Gunship kaufte. Den Apache flog ich damals noch mit einem Quickshot II. Ich denke das war der Anfang meiner virtuellen Fliegerkarriere, die mich bis heute nicht wieder loslassen sollte. Es folgten Amiga und schließlich der erste PC, natürlich gedacht fürs Studium Da man die vorherigen Home Computer nicht großartig upgraden konnte, fing also auch da das Herumbasteln an, mehr RAM, neue Graka, neuer Prozessor....Moment...der passt ja nicht mehr aufs Board....also neues Motherboard....Moment....da passt ja der RAM auch nicht mehr drauf....also wieder neuen RAM etc. pp. Natürlich waren die Mittel im Studium noch sehr beschränkt. Aber ich habe so einiges damit geflogen, genannt sei die Jane´s Reihe, USNF, EF-2000 und passend zum Ende des Studiums 1998 die noch heute bekannte Sim der Viper. Zu dem Zeitpunkt besaß ich bereits den F-16 FLCS und F-16 TQS von Thrustmaster, die dafür echt sehr gut geeignet waren, jedoch später wegen dem fehlenden Gameport einem HOTAS Cougar weichen mussten. Ich schwor mir, dass ich, wenn ich mal eigenes Geld verdiene, nicht mehr an der Hardware spare, um Flugsimulationen mit höchsten Details fliegen zu können. Somit habe ich immer weiter aufgerüstet, um dann festzustellen, dass ich gar nicht mehr die Zeit habe, alles so zu nutzen, wie ich es mir so vorgestellt habe. Doch ich war ja infiziert und entsprechend hielt es an, wobei etwas gebremst durch Hausbau, Kinder und nicht zuletzt meine Frau, die nicht immer ganz mit dem einverstanden war, was ich so gemacht habe. 2013 ist mir dann DCS World irgendwie untergekommen, ich hatte eine DVD der A-10 für 19,90 EUR erstanden. Ich würde sagen zwischen 2006 bis zu dem Zeitpunkt war es verhältnismäßig ruhig an der Hardwarefront. Aber die Hog hat mich gleich gepackt und ich bin kontinuierlich tiefer eingestiegen, habe dann 2015 den Schritt in Richtung Multiplayer gewagt. Ich habe verhältnismäßig wenig Module, da ich eher in die Tiefe, als in die Breite gehe, Zeit ist immernoch ein Faktor, Geld nicht mehr so sehr (natürlich sind die Diskussionen nach wie vor da, die Frau war immer die gleiche, die habe ich nicht upgegraded ). Dafür habe ich alle Maps, weil ich die Entwickler auch gerne unterstützen möchte. Klar habe ich auch Module, die ich mir gekauft, aber nicht wirklich genutzt habe, kennt jeder hier. Heute freuen sich meine beiden Söhne (18 und 12) darüber, wenn ich Hardware austausche, da sie dann immer durchgetauscht wird. Der Kleine fliegt sogar, hat dafür meinen Warthog bekommen. VR ist aktuell für mich kein Thema, entsprechend flüssig läuft DCS auf meinem Rechner. Aber, wer kennt das nicht, irgendwie juckt es einem immer zwischen den Fingern. Was kann ich noch machen? Was würde dir noch helfen oder Freude bringen. Und das ist es auch, die virtuelle Fliegerei bringt mir so viel Freude und ergänzt mein Leben derart, dass ich gerne gewillt bin, mein sauer verdientes Geld darin zu investieren. Es kamen hier schon die Beispiele von Auto- und Motorradenthusiasten. Ich glaube da ist dieses Hobby noch relativ kostengünstig im direkten Vergleich. Meine aktuelle Wishlist beinhaltet ein Upgrade von CPU, MoBo und RAM (der PC des Großen schafft Win 11 nicht, entsprechend muss ich handeln ). Der Samsung 57" lächelt mich auch an, der steht schon seit 1 Jahr auf meiner Wunschliste, aber ist mir noch zu teuer. Ruderpedale täten es auch mal ein paar neue. Also noch genug Futter für die nächsten Jahre. Ach ja, der 57" mach 2x 4K Auflösung, ob die 4080 das noch schafft? Es hört nie auf, nieeeee Sorry, dass ich diesen thread mal mit meinem FluSi Leben geentert habe, aber hier scheinen viele Gleichgesinnte unterwegs zu sein. Ich bin also nicht der einzig Verrückte, für den meine Frau mich hält

The team will have a list of early access features to share soon. thank you

The only time I can't add a custom engine sound is when the unit is equipped with radar. Due to a DCS bug, the engine sound will then be locked in position, so the vehicle will drive away from the sound. Very strange bug.

My community has done some more testing to check the effectiveness of the AN/ALQ-184 against different threats in DCS. As you can see, in its current state, the AN/ALQ-184 in DCS is practically useless in Mode 1 and Mode 2 against all concievable threats, and should never be used in those modes in its current state as it only really decreases/inhibits your own radar performance but not the enemies. Mode 3 barrage jamming is the only effective method if it is activated before you get locked (same performance as Mode 1 and Mode 2 if activated after lock), but it really only has a tactical impact against very long range SAMs like the SA-5 and SA-10. For most medium and short range SAM systems, even Mode 3 has a negligable impact if any at all and should probably not be used. Seeing as the AN/ALQ-184 is quoted, in real life, as being extremely effective and being a main contributor to the extremely low kill rate of SAM systems against platforms carrying this jamming system (primarily wild weasel F-16CM-50's), it has to be markedly more effective than it currently is in DCS. I think it's fair to say that electronic warfare is the single most important aspect of aerial warfare in today's age, and seeing as just the AN/ALQ-184 program alone has cost billions of dollars and ended up being equipped on the US Air Force's premiere SEAD platform, it must bring with it a major tactical advantage, which we don't see in DCS at the moment. You also have to remember that the AN/ALQ-184 in DCS seemingly has 360 degree coverage. In real life, it uses Rotman lenses fore and aft, meaning that it cannot jam threats off to the sides, or above/below the host aircraft. Based on public information about Rotman lenses in the scientific field, we know that they have the ability to jam multiple emitters in multiple bands simultaneously, with quite a wide field of view but with a dropoff in effective radiated power towards the edges of it's field of view, at very high angles. This should reasonable mean that, in real life, the AN/ALQ-184's tactical use has to be great enough to make it worthwhile for a pilot to point his aircraft towards or away from an emitter after getting locked up, and also make it effective enough to be used on wild weasel F-16C's whose sole job is to fly in and get locked up and shot at by various SAM systems. Currently in DCS, seeing as Mode 3 is the only effective mode, you have to completely inhibit your own radar and HTS pod and fly around blind to get any use out of ECM, making you wholly ineffective as a wild weasel. Whether you are in Mode 1, 2 or 3, you cannot expect to break locks at any meaningful range, meaning that you need to constantly barrage jam before being locked up to get any protection at all, and even this would only result in SAM systems launching in home-on-jam mode or enemy signal interception systems triangulating your position in real time. Anyways, here are the experimentally acquired values in DCS: ECM Mode Max lock distance Max stable lock distance ---SA-2 OFF 27.5 nm 27.5 nm Mode 1 27.5 nm 27.5 nm Mode 2 27.5 nm 27.5 nm Mode 3 24 nm 24 nm ---SA-3 OFF 14.5 nm 14.5 nm Mode 1 14.5 nm 14.5 nm Mode 2 14.5 nm 14.5 nm Mode 3 14.5 nm 13 nm ---SA-5 OFF 75 nm 75 nm Mode 1 75 nm 72 nm Mode 2 75 nm 72 nm Mode 3 31 nm 31 nm ---SA-6 OFF 24 nm 24 nm Mode 1 24 nm 24 nm Mode 2 24 nm 23 nm Mode 3 21 nm 21 nm ---SA-8 OFF 11.5 nm 11.5 nm Mode 1 11.5 nm 11.5 nm Mode 2 11.5 nm 11.5 nm Mode 3 10.8 nm 10.8 nm ---SA-10 OFF 35 nm 35 nm Mode 1 35 nm 32 nm Mode 2 35 nm 35 nm Mode 3 24.5 nm 24.5 nm ---SA-11 OFF 21 nm 21 nm Mode 1 21 nm 18 nm Mode 2 21 nm 18 nm Mode 3 15.5 nm 15.5 nm ---SA-15 OFF 10 nm 10 nm Mode 1 10 nm 8 nm Mode 2 10 nm 8 nm Mode 3 6.5 nm 6.5 nm ---SA-19 OFF 6 nm 6 nm Mode 1 6 nm 6 nm Mode 2 6 nm 6 nm Mode 3 6 nm 6 nm

indeed. What would be epic is if it included the following functions: Ability to load up weapons for transfer of items that affects warehousing. Ability to drive 'player drivable' vehicles in and out. Ability to load nearby non-player drivable cars in and out using menu. (With animation) Ability to load and unload troops, both by ramp on ground, as well as repelling by air (with animations) The ability to use as a mobile FARP. (Refuel & rearm) - with mission editor options as to whether it deploys as a full farp with unlimited weapon and fuel quantities, or only the warehouse quantity that it first flew with and/or what other logistic units carry there to add. The ability to fly it to a destination, unload a player drivable vehicle, and then switch to and drive that vehicle around using CA, and then later return as pilot to the Chinook at a later time. The ability to fly it to a destination, and then spawn into another aircraft separately with the Chinook remaining at it's current location as a milk cow. (And ability to spawn back into it at a later date and re-take control of Chinook) The ability to act as a dynamic spawn point (FARP) for other players to spawn aircraft in at the location that it sets up as a FARP. (Dynamic / portable spawn location). Some of those I see as likely, others I see as maybe, and others I think I'm fantasizing about, but would still be epic to have.

I don't think that's entirely correct. We have transported AIM-120C's and other munitions before from one airport to another that affects the warehouse logistics. (By arming an aircraft with them, and then 'unloading' them the other end by disarming said aircraft), so the provision for the logistics already exists for using aircraft for transport. It's a matter of whether ED has the foresight of allowing the loading of these same munitions into the CH-47 (as cargo obviously because the CH-47 can't use said munitions) . As a coder I wouldn't imagine this would be too difficult to include during development of the CH-47 - but as a coder I also understand that assumptions from the outside of relative ease don't always reflect the truth when people can't actually see the code in question too. With 2 new major CTLD players on the horizon (CH-47 and C-130), I'm really hoping that ED have put some forward thinking into expanding DCS. Having a vehicle in the Chinook already hints that ED may have already been focusing on this. How far it goes we really won't know until they announce more information, or until after launch, but they seem to be holding their cards close to their chest (for now).

Needed a Fake TV News Station Helicopter in a Mission that needed to get shot down by terrorist at the start of a Mission Section and I only found one so in line with what my mind was thinking about I made this. It is uploading to my file area so after it is finished you can download the skin if needed.

Having most other modules (including all of the existing choppers), I had a very good think about the Chinook and have decided that it’s a no from me. Not that I don’t want a Chinook. However, I’ve come to the conclusion that the time period I enjoy the most is Cold War. So I’d love a Vietnam suitable version, but a glass auto lots just doesn’t appeal.

Yes. Might try again down the road. For now will keep w my 4k 48 LG OLED, surround speakers, 2 Buttkickers, TrackIR. The heat, lower res, nausea ( i know i know), and harder to drink my beer, just no go for me quite yet.

Yeah, me - the wow-effect was gone in a few sessions and I was constantly annoyed with the rather low visual fidelity, much lower than on a quality screen. I was constantly angry about how <profanity>ty it looked, and I don't like being constantly angry about something so expensive. I'll give it another try in a bit of time - it certainly is the way of the future, but it's not yet there for me, personally.

Hi, Thanks a lot for clarifying this, as I had the same doubt myself. Also thanks for the swiss skins, as I was not aware of them. I'm currently fully immersed on the Viggen, but as soon as I've got enough free time, I will try to update my old training missions to make them compatible with the latest T-45, including your scripts. Best regards, Eduardo

Any info about this? http://youtu.be/Cs2bcw-i00U?si=xoJ29hTW2nAjCVsT

I probably don't need to remind you, but it's also one of the basic options for Chinnok with external container. https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/Article-View/Article/2183107/ny-army-guard-helicopter-crews-conduct-water-bucket-training/

Thanks all, we are taking a good look at this now.

Hello @felixx75, this issue was previously reported internally on a prior date. EDIT: Oh, that must have been you.

“request repair” ”Copy” “All fixed and dried Sir, enjoy the water park”.

On top of all that, you can't trial modules on Steam, Steam also doesn't have pre-order atm. And Steam takes about 30% of the price, so buying on Steam you pay 30% less to ED. Steam is well thought of platform that will keep DCS updated (which you can do on your own anyway, it takes a double click), but its a mere middle guy taking your money. If you want to truly support ED, buy from ED shop.

Just a reminder (6:15) And another reminder (1:13:58)

I hope that the topic will be refined well from the very beginning and as it should be. The CH-47 without new cargo options is like a toothless bull terrier, which is what the helicopter is intended for. Unfortunately, I still don't see anything new when it comes to cargo. We already have this in DCS and it is not new: (come on guys!) Im still wiating for news about it: This is new only (if he can leave the copter):

1. I have disabled the deadzone on my VRP stick, and I have no deadzone in the axis tuning for the FA-18C 2. I have no problem with AP/BALT. I adjust my flight path to level flight, which is easy on the Hornet, and engage AP/BALT. That does it. 3. However, I confirm the problem with AP/HDG. I had set the heading to 20 ° and engaged AP/HDG. The UFC shows HDG engaged, but the Hornet continues flying straight ahead. Only after I wiggled the stick a little bit, it turned to the 20 ° heading. I attach a track demonstrating the issue. @NineLine: Please report! FA-18C AP HDG Bug.trk

not yet, for the moment we are focus on our Alphajet but it will be fix in future ( 'cause Alphajet have the same issue too)

Absolutely, I completely agree with you. It's incredibly frustrating trying to engage something like a Mirage2000 on the DogFighters Server. The pipper often misaligns so much that pulling the trigger when it’s positioned right over the target feels futile since the firing solution is almost always off. I’ve stopped relying on locking altogether and have switched to manual deflection shooting because it’s simpler. When it comes to one circle fights, the F-16 is even more of a challenge as you've noted. The delay in the pipper response makes the firing solution so unpredictable that it’s hard to know where your shots will end up, let alone if they’re on target. The most reliable method I’ve found for taking down an opponent is engaging in a 2 circle fight at low altitude, focusing on funneling and pulling straight through with a good pre and after fire (without waiting for the pipper to confirm)

Ditto. I haven’t flown it for a bit and hadn’t seen this thread liven up. As someone that has to stop myself from posting lengthy waffles, as well as not being a user of any discords, I’m quite happy to read what’s been going on here and grateful for it. Good on ya for doing what you can for everyone to enjoy this more, it’s a great little jet and if I’d have paid for it I don’t think I’d be complaining too much. I’ll have to get back in it, I’ve been growling at my toebrakes in the Mustang lately. Tea and medals all round then, smoke me a kipper n all that

Vaporware.... M3 yet has none talked about UsNavy air AI units, and we dont know what others aircrafts has building ED WW2 assets pack team. Only have a AM6 Zero (ED) on "2024 and Beyond", and actualy I think ED and M3 has on "blackout" without show none about other on progress assets. Remember La-7 has on progress by Octopus-G 3rd Party, and the team has not a "Assets pack team" as M3 and others.

It seems like the devs are focused on theirs, just like e.g. MilTech-5, Polychop-Simulations and more. I'm pretty sure they don't plan to build a module for themselves only Patience, good things take time - sometimes even more than 8 years, apparently. Stay put! EDIT: I will also add - the development time, is not any different from others, if a finished module is what Magnitude 3 wants to release. Just notice how many modules have been in a "early access"-state, and how long. There is nothing wrong with either model of releasing modules. Again, let's wait and see.

Showing up every 6 months posting a bunch of random pics of what looks like a finished module and saying vauge stuff like: ready for take off. Then nothing else. Then 6 months later more pics of a module that looks exactly the same as 6 month earlier with no explanations. Or posting a yearly update (after not having planned on doing it) says the last thing to be implemented was the damage modeling. Then 6 months pass. Picture of finished damage modeling. So is everything ready to go now? Nope suddenly vidoes of basic cockpit animations show. Up we never get explanations for thise cockpit animation videos. Are they just now adding cockpit animations? Why didn't they mention that 6 months earlier? Or is it just old stuff they thought was neat to show off. We don't know as they never bothered to say anything about these random vidoes. Then another 3-4 months go by. And get an update. They update by itself is perfectly fine, goes into more detail than any previous update they've had for years. Only problem is that they talk about the need to fine tune the flight model at various altitudes etc. So when they 9 months earlier said the last thing to do was damage modeling, they weren't honest? Something changed? No other module in DCS sphere has been so long in production, seemd so close to being finished for so long yet so little info actually given. 1. 8 years is just a silly long time to produce a module and is a unique even for dcs. 2. Combined with bad/incomplete/lack of info on what they are doing. Can't compare the Corsair situation with F4, or C130 or any other module in production. Extraordinary claims need Extraordinary explanations. Can be DCSed up to Extraordinary production time need Extraordinary explanations.

Next feature, I really hope it will be as well. CH-47 can do this. This is an example of quite large immersions, but it is also a practice to open the ramp just above the water and pull the pontoon in and out with a winch.

Tried with both a Kilo class and the Type 093. Even at a depth of 115 feet, both subs still leaving large, distinct wake on the surface. Edit to add this is on the PG Map. Haven't experimented with other maps yet.

Let's use videos taken from the deck, because as @Micr0 underlined, photographers "cheat" with longer exposure. Videos don't cheat as much. Here's some footage from CVN-69 and CVN-70 (Nimitz class): CVN-78 here (Ford class): Back to the Nimitz class with CVN-72: According to these videos, this photo does not cheat: Here's a last one from CVN-76 (Nimitz class), with what looks like a longer exposition, but it's very useful to locate the spotlights: null A few observations: In most videos, the lower part of the island appears to be lit in yellow. This light comes from spotlights pointing downward. These spotlights are never lit in DCS. In all videos, the middle part of the island stays dark (they don't seem to use the top yellow lights very often). In DCS, the blue/teal lights are always turned off, while the top yellow lights are always turned on. In the last video, many lights are off. I assume it's a wartime configuration. In DCS, there's no such thing.

The loadout that's considered to be standard for A/A sports a centreline fuel tank (instead of the wing tanks) so that leaves no room for an ECM pod. For purely A/G missions where you take 2 wing tanks, it's probably a good idea to take an ECM pod but that would also depend on the expected threat level. IRL the last 20 years or so have seen operations in very low-threat environments so I can't see any reason why you'd use one - as there's simply no need.

They are part of the standard load for SEAD missions when you intend to get within range. I don't mount them for dogfighting or BVR.

Update: Version 15 is out with new features and some fixes: - added the OpenAIP map overlay: it shows Navaids, Airspaces and Aerodromes, and can be toggled on/off with the 'AIP' button. - fixed a performance issue, where units 'disappeared' from the map in missions and on servers with a high number of units. As always, feedback is welcome! Enjoy! IMPORTANT: if you upgrade from an older version, you need to replace the movingmap-hook.lua file in your Saved Games\DCS[.openbeta]\Scripts\Hooks folder with the updated one included in the .zip file on the download page: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DCS MovingMap (free Windows version): https://movingmap.bergison.com/download DCS MovingMap Caucasus (free version): DCS MovingMap (full version supporting all DCS theaters) NOTE: consider installing the free Caucasus version first, to try out the app and to test if your DCS data export is working! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ To your questions: MovingMap does saves all settings in a file named config.cfg, which is already included in the .zip file. Make sure it is in the same folder as the DCS_MovingMap.exe and not read/write protected. We'd need a provider for (free) MGRS grid map tiles. I've looked around a bit but could not find any. If you happen to know or find such a service, I am happy to add it as a map overlay to MovingMap! I have just tested the Windows version on a 7" touchscreen, and the App works exactly like the Android version.

it wasn't something that made it through that shouldn't have. it was something that was reported, and adjustments were made based on feedback, but as stated already, one setting isn't ideal for everyone, and different displays etc etc, which is why a slider option is being suggested. going off topic and after the testing team wasn't needed, as most of the team also mentioned the initial implementation of the reflections were too strong, and that as well as feedback, led to discovery of the reflections rendered twice (realtime and baked textures). But as stated, it's new, and requires some tweaking based on a wider audience pool

Either of these will work, but the axis tune doesn't break my golden rule. Neither of them will alter the 50% instant application of brakes, but with this reduction in power, it doesn't matter any more ..

Спасибо. Что за модели найти не сложно, но интересуют более насущные для DCS вопросы, типа: когда будет доступно в игре, как будет распространяться, будет ли доступно для прямого управления игроком.

So... do we start seeing some Video's from Wags soon?

I don't think it's the brake strength (which, yes, could be addressed with curves but I've kept mine linear). I think the oleo strut shocks are too soft. So the strut is collapsing easier than it should. And I also think the tailwheel is modeling castering incorrectly when the stick is forward (though the visual model seems to show it is - and the suspension in the tailwheel I don't think I remember seeing before but it looks quite nice now). It sounds like it's trying to tell me something is skidding when I'm taxiing at low speed with the stick forward and one brake partially depressed to perform a tight turn. The tailwheel shouldn't skid in that case, it should caster, freewheeling around completely if need be. Oh and one more, with the tailwheel locked to the rudder (stick back) it doesn't seem to have as much steering authority as it did before. So that gives you even more reason to have to use the brakes.

Same here. its a Bug. Relight switch should stay in the On position for 30seconds or until deselected. It does if you use the Mouse to move it but any Keybinding its momentary.

Nice one Holbeach, I’ll try those tunings when I get back on it. Cheers TerryDactil too, if ‘plan A’ doesn’t work I’ll try your lua thing out. I’ve yet to mess about with all that but it’s looking like I might have to have a look soon. Exactly how I feel. It’s not as if there were threads of complaints about any of them either. I get that everything’s supposed to be improving and new tech gets implemented but it just doesn’t seem to be introduced properly. It’s brutally different and not entirely better to put it mildly. Having said that, I flew about on a training server earlier and landed it really well (for a change). Not wanting to ruin the fun I didn’t even think about braking. I rolled out almost to the fence before easing round, just with the rudder and prop. Someone else was flying another pony and when I died I started watching them as they were obviously practicing circuits and bumps. Whoever they were they had it sussed. I watched him come in a few times and make at least two landings that looked almost perfect to me. I saw him jolt as he must’ve tapped a brake but he had it sorted out. I felt I’d been taught a lesson that it could be done but we’ve definitely gotta soften those brakes up a bit and this bounce is just odd. I’m all for having a realistic suspension but something needs toning down. Looking forward to trying out these ‘community fixes’, well done all.

Outstanding!

There is no way Im pre-ordering until I know what's happening to 5 (!) of my current DLC purchases, the F-4E Winter pre-order that keeps slipping, and especially not without a comprehensive Ch-47F feature list or information about a new DCS logistics system. Im sure it will end up a good module, but Im not ready to expand the circus until things settles down a bit Hopefully all of this will be resolved before the Ch-47F pre-purchase ends.

The F4E experience has been the reason to hold on for purchase on/after release, regardless of the product. Paying the higher price for a product in hand, is for me, the more sensible option.

Are there any news? with the upcoming Kola map this asset would be at home

Yes! As soon as I see any new prints on HB's Discord, I'll post them here.

If ED is really confident with current F/A-18 status, they would proudly announce out of EA stage for their flag ship module...